{
  "id": "RL33063",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL33063",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 307764,
      "date": "2005-08-16",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T19:34:57.108029",
      "title": "Intellectual Property and Collaborative Research",
      "summary": "Innovative individuals and firms have increasingly engaged in collaborative research. The\ngreater\ncomplexity of modern technology, heightened specialization in advanced fields, improved means\nof communications, and the desire to share the risks and expenses of high technology research have\neach contributed to this trend. Congressional interest in creating an environment conducive to\ncollaborative research has resulted in numerous legislative initiatives. The Patent Law Amendments\nAct of 1984 and the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act of 2004\nare among those that have clarified patent law rules regarding joint inventors and cooperative\nresearch endeavors.\n \n Observers have nonetheless expressed concerns that applicable patent law standards may\ndiscourage, rather than foster, collaboration among researchers. Some patent law experts believe that\ncurrent rules identifying the members of a research team who qualify as joint inventors are too\nlenient, vague, and unpredictable. This standard may lead to uncertainties with respect to patent\nownership. It may also encourage strategic claims drafting during patent acquisition and\nenforcement.\n \n Another target of concern is the current legal rule governing the joint ownership of patents. In\nthe event more than one individual is considered to be a co-inventor of an invention that is patented,\neach such person is regarded as a joint owner of that patent. U.S. patent law further deems a joint\nowner of a patent to enjoy a \u201ctenancy-in-common,\u201d which allows him to exploit a\npatent without\nregard to the other owners. This property rule appears to maximize the opportunity for exploitation\nof the patented invention in the marketplace. Yet, because every inventor receives full rights in an\ninvention no matter what the extent of his contribution, this ownership principle could possibly lead\nto inequitable distributions of the profits of patented inventions.\n \n If Congress should deem a legislative response to be appropriate, some commentators have\ncalled for more specific legislative guidance on the joint inventorship standard. A possible reform\nwould be to stipulate bright-line rules, or possibly a list of factors that courts should consider, with\nrespect to joint inventorship. On the other hand, fashioning a workable standard of joint\ninventorship might prove difficult or ultimately be unnecessary. \n \n In addition, alternative ownership rules--such as considering ownership on a claim-by-claim,\nrather than a patent-by-patent basis--are a possibility. In weighing the desirability of any alternative\nto the current regime, concerns for ease of judicial administration and the diminution of the\nincentives of one joint owner to commercialize the patented invention may be appropriate. However,\nthe patent statute\u2019s joint inventorship and joint ownership standards are effectively default\nrules. As\ncollaborative researchers may reach alternative arrangements via contract, legal reform in this area\nmay not be a compelling need.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL33063",
          "sha1": "928ce454302e6ec958de62af82e5bee38c64a845",
          "filename": "files/20050816_RL33063_928ce454302e6ec958de62af82e5bee38c64a845.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL33063",
          "sha1": "7e7f9b2ef582a57003ee9667f5be0901c50b5219",
          "filename": "files/20050816_RL33063_7e7f9b2ef582a57003ee9667f5be0901c50b5219.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economic Policy",
    "Science and Technology Policy"
  ]
}